Twitter Updates

Niftiest Logo I've Seen in a While

The logo has two visual elements: The golfer and his swing, the spartan
face/helmet. Quite clever. Makes you look twice . . . and think twice.

[via Alex von Oech]

From the comments by Wes George:

This kind of ambiguous imagery has broader implications for how the whole cognitive mind responds to patterns. Notice that it is really difficult to hold both the golfer image and the Spartan in the mind's eye at the same moment and impossible while not vigilant.

Could this be a metaphor for how the human mind handles far more complex data sets and in fact be the explanation for confirmation bias and even the potential for human cooperation? For instance, once a researcher has “seen” that the evidence for a hypothesis is solid there is a tendency to only see new data in the light of the picture already dominant in the mind’s eye.

This tendency is massively increased in highly emotional charged situations such as political or cultural debates. If so, this is certainly one of the greatest hardwire blocks to humanity’s creative potential. And if it is physiologically based, then could it also be the result of natural selection forcing to limit the creative gestalt in human society in favour of cooperation? Or did this type of cognitive latching simply evolve out of the need to identify patterns rapidly and decisively rather than to dither as the lion stalks, so to speak.

It's a lot like those images where you could see either an old woman or a young lady (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/YoungGirl-OldWomanIllusion.html), a rabbit or a duck (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Rabbit-DuckIllusion.html),or two faces or a vase (http://www.optical-illusionist.com/illusions/rubin-vase-illusion).

Fascinating how my own culture seemed to pair certain specific qualities as opposites that were supposed to work to cancel each other out. Since many of these supposed "opposites" were character traits in me that I seemed to possess intensely that did not result in either/or exclusions, I decided these ideas of paradoxical opposites were entirely culturally defined.

You'll see this in how people so often seem to favor the use of extreme opposites as examples to explain something. I've come to regard implied opposites to be something to be laughed at.

Our thinking abilities are limited by our cultural definitions. Language freezes concepts in ways that do not necessarily represent reality. The only reason we assume things are real is because our language doesn't have enough ways to trot out imaginary hunches with serious intent.

Instead, we only have jokes and "play," which is hard for people to take seriously or even with the revered awe it deserves - the way it which it needs to be taken.

This kind of ambiguous imagery has broader implications for how the whole cognitive mind responds to patterns. Notice that it is really difficult to hold both the golfer image and the Spartan in the mind's eye at the same moment and impossible while not vigilant.

Could this be a metaphor for how the human mind handles far more complex data sets and in fact be the explanation for confirmation bias and even the potential for human cooperation?

For instance, once a researcher has “seen” that the evidence for a hypothesis is solid there is a tendency to only see new data in the light of the picture already dominant in the mind’s eye. This tendency is massively increased in highly emotional charged situations such as political or cultural debates.

If so, this is certainly one of the greatest hardwire blocks to humanity’s creative potential. And if it is physiologically based, then could it also be the result of natural selection forcing to limit the creative gestalt in human society in favour of cooperation?

Or did this type of cognitive latching simply evolve out of the need to identify patterns rapidly and decisively rather than to dither as the lion stalks, so to speak...

This is a little off topic but I saw it the other day and knew you'd enjoy it:

Read, every day, somthing no one else is reading.
Think, every day, something no one else is thinking.
Do, every day, something no one else would be silly enough to do.
It is bad for the mind to be always part of unanimity.
quote from Christopher Morley (1890-1957)